Note: This forum is not affiliated with World Sailing and comments on this forum do not represent an official interpretation of the rules, definitions, cases or regulations. The only official interpretations are those of World Sailing.
Upwind Mark rounding -Transition - Rules 12,14, 16, 18
Gijs Vlas
Nationality: Netherlands
1
I saw this video on Socials and captured it (attached as mp4), plus made below drawing of the situation as I see it.
Blue is appraching the upwind mark on port tack. (1) Green is one of a fleet of starboard tackers apporching on the layline. (1) Blue tacks clear, becomes close hauled and ahead of Green - she lost some speed in the tack (2) Apparently Blue leaves Green (now inside/behind) room (3) BUT .... (4) She immediately bears away to leeward where Yellow is coming up close behind.
In my humble opinion - Blue did not break any rule in stage 1-2 and 3. She tacked clear and ahead, Green then became subject to rule 12 beind clear behind with no overlap. Considering Green on the inside (Rule 18) Blue should, or would be wise to allow Yellow enough room. BUT Blue breaks rule 16.1 by changing course and bearing away and not staying clear of Green. Blue DSQ under 16.1
Interested in the specialists view and opinion. HAPPY EASTER ALL !
☒
Created: 24-Mar-30 12:35
Comments
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
2
Gijs, I would disagree with your drawing. The tacking boat passes HTW at 11sec, reaches close-hauled 14-15 sec and her bow is likely at the mark at 17 sec (as the inside-leeward boat reaches the mark at 19 sec).
The tacking boat is clearly inside the zone. Let's first get the drawing correct so people are talking about the same thing. I would put the tacking boat less than 1 BL from the mark when she finishes her tack.
PS: Look like fun boats!
Created: 24-Mar-30 12:37
Gijs Vlas
Nationality: Netherlands
1
@Angelo - I will make a new drawing - I did not time it where you did :-) Thanks! So to your opinion the tacking boat has Right of Way, mark-room. (?) The other boat is coming from behind, hence has no rights to "stick her bow in" ? Rule 12 & 18 ? Which leaves me with the question where rule 16.1 comes into play? The tacking boat has rounded the mark, did have her room (clear ahead) and changes her course bearing away to downwind.... while getting overlapped on the inside...since she left some space inbetween herself and the mark.
Created: 24-Mar-30 12:49
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
1
Gijs, this will be about applying rules 10, 13, 12, 11, 18.3 .. and maybe 16.1, 31 and 14 (sort'a in that order).
When you make your new drawing, show the tacking boat at her positions of
head-to-wind
Close-hauled
When the boats become overlapped
That will help the discussion of the rules transitions.
Created: 24-Mar-30 12:54
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
0
OK. Gijs updated the drawing ... I think it's much closer. Who wants to take a whack at stepping through it?
Gijs ... important question here. Was there any contact between the boats or the mark?
Created: 24-Mar-30 15:35
Murray Cummings
Nationality: New Zealand
0
Gijs Vlas
The other boat is coming from behind, hence has no rights to "stick her bow in" ? Rule 12 & 18 ?
I believe the other boat has a right to "stick her bow in", subject to rule 14. RRS 18.3 places the onus on Blue to give mark-room, and Blue has no protection from 18.2(f).
Created: 24-Mar-30 15:42
P
Anthony Pelletier
Certifications:
Club Race Officer
Judge In Training
1
I agree with Angelo that the timing suggests Blue passed head to wind in the zone. Figure a Bolt 37 traveling 6-7 knots takes 3-4 seconds to travel a boat length. Blue was at close hauled about 3-4 seconds before reaching the mark, so, about a boat length and therefore blue passed head to wind in the zone. With the usual caveats about having only a limited view, Blue looks like she didn't break rule 13 and was born off to close hauled. 10 and 11 shut off when blue passes head to wind. Since the tack is in the zone and blue is now fetching the mark, rule 18.3 applies. Blue is fine with respect to the first part of 18.3, but the last clause says: "she shall give mark-room if that boat becomes overlapped inside her." Mark room is room to sail to and pass the mark on the required side and without violating rule 31. Because the drawing and the video suggest that green contacted the mark (breaks rule 31) and there is minor contact between boats with no damage or injury (that last part is important and would change part of my decision if there was damage or injury).
Facts found and rules applied: 37-foot sailboats sailing at 6-7 knots in 10-15 knot breeze and flat water approaching windward mark. Blue on port, Green on Starboard lay line or slightly above.
Blue passes head to wind in the zone and completes the tack clear ahead of green 1 boat length from the mark (18.3)
After tacking, Blue is fetching the mark
Green subsequently becomes overlapped inside Blue (18.3 applies)
As Blue bore off to round the mark, Green did not have sufficient room to round the mark: Contact with the mark occurred and minor contact between bow of Blue and lifeline and port hull of green at the position of Green's traveler.
There was no damage or injury resulting from the contact.
Conclusions and decision Green breaks rule 31 but is exonerated under 43. (Green, sailing with mark room and ROW, does not have to act to avoid contact until it is clear Blue is not keeping clear). Blue breaks rule 18.3 and rule 14. Blue is DSQed.
As an aside, I don't see 12 or 16 as relevant here. For the brief period that green is clear astern, she keeps clear of blue. Green gets the overlap to leeward from clear astern and would be required to bear off after passing the mark to sail her proper course. 16 applies to a ROW boat changing course. Blue is not ROW.
Created: 24-Mar-30 17:01
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
0
Anthony: "As an aside, I don't see 12 or 16 as relevant here. For the brief period that green is clear astern, she keeps clear of blue."
What about Blue and rule 11?
Created: 24-Mar-30 17:11
P
Anthony Pelletier
Certifications:
Club Race Officer
Judge In Training
0
Angelo: The OP asked about 12, 14, 16 and 18. My conclusion/decision should also include 11. I was getting a bit long-winded. Rule 18.3 was still in effect. But Blue also failed to keep clear of Leeward Green.
Created: 24-Mar-30 18:05
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
0
Anthony, I think your write-up looks pretty good. Here are a few suggestions treating what you wrote as a decision of the PC.
It's good to get into the habit of writing your FF's and conclusions always in the past tense. You did put your decision in present tense, that's good practice too.
We mentioned rule 11 in the conclusions which would not be exonerated for Blue.
You do mention that Yellow becomes overlapped in your FF's, but how that overlap occurs is important.
In the drawing and video, it is Blue turning to leeward that I think causes the overlap. Therefore, Yellow become ROW not by her own actions and rule 15 doesn't apply to her.
Had Blue held a close-hauled course and Yellow overtook Blue from clear astern, then rule 15 would have applied to Yellow, but yellow would be exonerated if she broke 15 by 43.1(b).
However you want to call it, you'd want a FF that supports one or the other.
Created: 24-Mar-30 21:29
P
Anthony Pelletier
Certifications:
Club Race Officer
Judge In Training
0
Thanks for the feedback, Angelo. I was getting a little sloppy with tense in my conclusion. I Did mention how I saw the overlap being established in my discussion, but forgot to include it in the facts found (obviously, I was rushing more than I should have been). I saw it as established from clear astern, but went back and forth arguing with myself over whether it was due to the actions of Blue. The overlap is established at about time stamp 17s in the video. You are correct that Blue is still turning, but it is also true that Green was overtaking. In the end, rule 15 was not really in play because Blue had plenty of room to keep clear even if Green got the overlap from clear astern. It would have mattered had Blue given room and Green had sailed past the point where her proper course would have required her to turn towards the next mark. I decided it was superfluous in this case. I did think that my facts supported my conclusions. Did you have additional feedback as to how my FF's didn't quite satisfy that?
Created: 24-Mar-30 22:55
P
John Allan
Certifications:
National Judge
Regional Race Officer
1
I suggest it is useful to form conclusions in the following order:
which boats were required to keep clear and whether any failed to do so.
which boats were required to give room (under rules 15, 16, or 19) and whether any failed to do so.
which boats were required to give mark-room (under rule 18) or broke rule 18.3 and whether any failed to do so.
whether any boats that failed to keep clear or give room were entitled to mark-room and were sailing within that mark-room (which would lead to exoneration under rule 43.1(b))
whether any boats that failed to keep clear or give room or mark-room were compelled to break that rule by another boat breaking a rule (which would lead to exoneration under rule 43.1(a)) AND ONLY THEN, with respect to contact between boats
with respect to a boat not having right of way or not sailing within any room or mark-room to which she was entitled, whether it was reasonably possible for her to have avoided contact, in which case she broke rule 14
with respect to a boat having right of way or sailing within the room or mark-room to which she is entitled, whether it was reasonably possible for her, acting no sooner than it was clear that the other boat was not keeping clear or giving room or mark-room, to have avoided contact (rule 14 last sentence): If it was not possible, she does not break 14 at all.
If it was possible, but there is no injury or damage she is exonerated by rule 43.1(c)."
Use the Preferred Wordings. That is to say, have the Preferred Wordings document open an copy and paste each conclusion.
Created: 24-Mar-30 23:20
P
John Allan
Certifications:
National Judge
Regional Race Officer
0
Angelo Guarino said Created: Today 21:29
You do mention that Yellow becomes overlapped in your FF's, but how that overlap occurs is important.
In the drawing and video, it is Blue turning to leeward that I think causes the overlap. Therefore, Yellow become ROW not by her own actions and rule 15 doesn't apply to her.
Had Blue held a close-hauled course and Yellow overtook Blue from clear astern, then rule 15 would have applied to Yellow, but yellow would be exonerated if she broke 15 by 43.1(b).
However you want to call it, you'd want a FF that supports one or the other.
If you don't state a conclusion about any particular rule, then I don't think you need to state any Facts Found to establish that the rule was not broken.
And while it's good practice to consider all rules that might have been broken, you don't then have to write conclusions about every rule that was not broken. Exception to this, I think, is where a party substantially argues that a particular rule has been broken, and you conclude that it hasn't.
In this case (the Blue/Green diagram), I'd be inclined to say that G is giving B room to keep clear at every stage so she's not breaking RRS 15 or 16, or 17, or 20, or 30 ..... and there is no need to say so.
Created: 24-Mar-30 23:50
Philip Hubbell
Nationality: United States
Certifications:
Club Race Officer
Judge In Training
1
Additional fact found, engaging 18.3: Green had been on starboard tack since entering the zone.
Created: 24-Mar-31 00:22
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
0
John re: "And while it's good practice to consider all rules that might have been broken, you don't then have to write conclusions about every rule that was not broken. "
Agree. No need to state rules not broken. Hopefully what I wrote was not suggesting that. What I was suggesting was that he mentions that Yellow becomes overlapped to leeward and I thought it's worth considering stating in the FF's how that overlap occurred.
If 15 applied and it's not broken, no need to say so, but the facts of how the overlap happened I think should still be stated (JMO).
PS: Perhaps a FF like below inserted after the FF that Blue completed her tack clear ahead of Yellow ... replacing the current overlap FF.
After reaching a close-hauled course, Blue continued to alter course to port while Yellow held her course. Blue's stern became overlapped with windward of Yellow's bow when Yellow was 1BL from the mark. Blue and Yellow were separated by 1 boat width.
Created: 24-Mar-31 00:28
P
Niko Kotsatos
Certifications:
Judge In Training
0
This was a very helpful discussion. Learned a lot from Anthony's write-up as well as the subsequent comments. Thanks all.
Created: 24-Apr-01 14:57
P
John Allan
Certifications:
National Judge
Regional Race Officer
0
Anthony, Phil, Probably need a fact in there that the SI required to mark to be rounded to port as a condition for RRS 18.3 to apply.
Created: 24-Apr-02 03:50
Mark Evans
Certifications:
Club Judge
Club Race Officer
0
See case # 93
Created: 24-Apr-04 15:51
P
Angelo Guarino
Certifications:
Regional Judge
Fleet Measurer
0
Mark, the difference between Case 93 and the OP is that the leeward boat in the OP does not alter course toward the windward boat.
The tacking boat is clearly inside the zone. Let's first get the drawing correct so people are talking about the same thing. I would put the tacking boat less than 1 BL from the mark when she finishes her tack.
PS: Look like fun boats!
So to your opinion the tacking boat has Right of Way, mark-room. (?) The other boat is coming from behind, hence has no rights to "stick her bow in" ? Rule 12 & 18 ?
Which leaves me with the question where rule 16.1 comes into play? The tacking boat has rounded the mark, did have her room (clear ahead) and changes her course bearing away to downwind.... while getting overlapped on the inside...since she left some space inbetween herself and the mark.
When you make your new drawing, show the tacking boat at her positions of
That will help the discussion of the rules transitions.
Gijs ... important question here. Was there any contact between the boats or the mark?
Since the tack is in the zone and blue is now fetching the mark, rule 18.3 applies. Blue is fine with respect to the first part of 18.3, but the last clause says: "she shall give mark-room if that boat becomes overlapped inside her."
Mark room is room to sail to and pass the mark on the required side and without violating rule 31.
Because the drawing and the video suggest that green contacted the mark (breaks rule 31) and there is minor contact between boats with no damage or injury (that last part is important and would change part of my decision if there was damage or injury).
Facts found and rules applied:
37-foot sailboats sailing at 6-7 knots in 10-15 knot breeze and flat water approaching windward mark. Blue on port, Green on Starboard lay line or slightly above.
Conclusions and decision
Green breaks rule 31 but is exonerated under 43.
(Green, sailing with mark room and ROW, does not have to act to avoid contact until it is clear Blue is not keeping clear).
Blue breaks rule 18.3 and rule 14.
Blue is DSQed.
What about Blue and rule 11?
My conclusion/decision should also include 11. I was getting a bit long-winded. Rule 18.3 was still in effect. But Blue also failed to keep clear of Leeward Green.
I did think that my facts supported my conclusions. Did you have additional feedback as to how my FF's didn't quite satisfy that?
Use the Preferred Wordings. That is to say, have the Preferred Wordings document open an copy and paste each conclusion.
If you don't state a conclusion about any particular rule, then I don't think you need to state any Facts Found to establish that the rule was not broken.
And while it's good practice to consider all rules that might have been broken, you don't then have to write conclusions about every rule that was not broken. Exception to this, I think, is where a party substantially argues that a particular rule has been broken, and you conclude that it hasn't.
In this case (the Blue/Green diagram), I'd be inclined to say that G is giving B room to keep clear at every stage so she's not breaking RRS 15 or 16, or 17, or 20, or 30 ..... and there is no need to say so.
Agree. No need to state rules not broken. Hopefully what I wrote was not suggesting that. What I was suggesting was that he mentions that Yellow becomes overlapped to leeward and I thought it's worth considering stating in the FF's how that overlap occurred.
If 15 applied and it's not broken, no need to say so, but the facts of how the overlap happened I think should still be stated (JMO).
PS: Perhaps a FF like below inserted after the FF that Blue completed her tack clear ahead of Yellow ... replacing the current overlap FF.